India in England 2014 July 19, 2014

BCCI questions lack of video for Anderson case

24

Indian officials have questioned why crucial video footage that could have shed light on the alleged altercation between James Anderson and Ravindra Jadeja is not available.

The Indian team allege that Anderson initiated physical contact with Jadeja during the lunch break on the second day of the first Investec Test at Trent Bridge.

Anderson will attend a preliminary hearing in London on Tuesday morning, after he was charged with a Level 3 offence under the ICC's code of conduct. If the charge is upheld, Anderson could be suspended for anything up to four Tests. The hearing will be held over teleconference with Australian Gordon Lewis presiding.

While players from both teams are set to provide conflicting evidence, India have requested that footage from a video camera situated just outside the dressing rooms where the incident occurred be made available.

A Nottinghamshire spokesman confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that a camera had been installed in the relevant area but insisted that it had not been active at the time.

India have reacted with incredulity to the response that the camera was not switched on at the time. They have also expressed some disappointment that none of the broadcasters appear to have footage of the alleged incident.

But the ECB and Nottinghamshire deny any suggestion that any evidence has been suppressed. Instead, they say that the camera was installed only a few weeks ago in order to provide visitors to the club's website with some insight to life inside the pavilion during major games. It is not currently online and the ECB insists it never has been.

The development is the latest in an episode that has done nothing to improve relations between the teams. While India captain MS Dhoni has said Anderson "crossed the line" during the alleged altercation, England captain Alastair Cook has said India are using the incident as "a tactic" to sideline England's leading bowler and have made "a mountain out of a molehill" by escalating it to a Level 3 offence.

England also hit back by making a complaint about Jadeja leading to the ICC levelling a Level 2 charge.

But a BCCI official confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that their complaint was the result of building frustration at Anderson's behaviour. The official stated that India felt they had a responsibility to bring a case against the player as he had, in their words, earned a reputation with opposition teams around the world as being unusually abusive.

They were also unhappy that Paul Downton, the managing director of England cricket, intervened to try to persuade India coach, Duncan Fletcher, to have the charge withdrawn. However, the ECB has indicated that Fletcher was initially open to a more amicable solution and it was Dhoni who wanted to take the matter further.

Certainly there seems little chance that the issue can be resolved with a handshake. While the ICC chief executive Dave Richardson confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that the complaints could be withdrawn, the India camp is adamant that Anderson's behaviour is a boil that needs lancing and there appears to be very little common ground between the opposing sides.

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • PeerieTrow on July 20, 2014, 11:15 GMT

    DRS in the pavilion but not on the field? Interesting concept. It sounds to me as if the question, "Please may we see the video footage?" was asked in the knowledge that there wasn't any. Gamesmanship!

  • Tykeswin on July 20, 2014, 11:01 GMT

    Seems like India have already confirmed that they are taking this route because they do not like Anderson's verbals. Somewhat childish behaviour on their part I think, best response would be to concentrate on the cricket.

  • markatnotts on July 20, 2014, 10:44 GMT

    @Rishav, were you upstairs outside the dressing rooms and therefore saw what happened? And if Anderson is guilty he can be suspended for between 2 and 4 games not 1 and 2.

  • on July 20, 2014, 10:26 GMT

    Anderson will be suspended for 1 test or 2

  • shot274 on July 20, 2014, 9:40 GMT

    As a neutral i find some of the comments perplexing. Firstly this isnt a playground ,its an international test match arena. Video evidence of the incident has nothing whatsoever to do with DRS. I dont think India are fabricating either-there may be some garnishing and it is unlikely that Anderson will be suspended.However i hope fans realise that if there is even an iota of truth in it then this sort of behaviour should not be tolerated and universally condemned -not justified due to Indias stance regarding DRS.

  • ReverseSweepRhino on July 20, 2014, 9:36 GMT

    I think both sides are simply trying to make more out of this incident than there really is. By creating an "us vs them" feeling among the fans, they are trying to raise the emotional profile of this series off the field, because it has been off to an underwhelming start on the field.

    Both captains would be happy to have their home media focus elsewhere, instead of being critical of their boring on-field tactics.

  • BlueJoy on July 20, 2014, 9:19 GMT

    DRS is there or not is a different matter, this concerns the security of the players which is of paramount importance. How Indian players are supposed to know that the Camera is not working. They have the right to ask for it.

    Whatever happens on the pitch we can take it as the spirit of the great game. But not in the pavilion. Dismiss it says the team who made the bar fight between Warner and Root to epic proportions. That being said if India is making wrong allegations they should be punished for that as well.

    Even though this should be pushed out as lack of evidence of Digital proof, we can be never sure of whether there is a neutral witness. Now after the Jellybean incident, Nottingham is quite the controversy ground for Test matches as far as India is concerned.

    Ishant Sharma is nowhere as aggressive as Broad or Anderson with the ball or attitude.

  • milepost on July 20, 2014, 9:18 GMT

    @newschoolcricket, spot on. Henrik doesn't know what he's on about.

  • on July 20, 2014, 9:04 GMT

    surely if a broadcaster had captured the incident it would have been all over the news. no video evidence Anderson's word against Jadejas case not proven.

  • SpaMaster on July 20, 2014, 8:31 GMT

    Funny so many ill-informed people with their sentiments against India are trying to equate lack of DRS on the field to approval of physical contact off the field. Open your eyes.

  • PeerieTrow on July 20, 2014, 11:15 GMT

    DRS in the pavilion but not on the field? Interesting concept. It sounds to me as if the question, "Please may we see the video footage?" was asked in the knowledge that there wasn't any. Gamesmanship!

  • Tykeswin on July 20, 2014, 11:01 GMT

    Seems like India have already confirmed that they are taking this route because they do not like Anderson's verbals. Somewhat childish behaviour on their part I think, best response would be to concentrate on the cricket.

  • markatnotts on July 20, 2014, 10:44 GMT

    @Rishav, were you upstairs outside the dressing rooms and therefore saw what happened? And if Anderson is guilty he can be suspended for between 2 and 4 games not 1 and 2.

  • on July 20, 2014, 10:26 GMT

    Anderson will be suspended for 1 test or 2

  • shot274 on July 20, 2014, 9:40 GMT

    As a neutral i find some of the comments perplexing. Firstly this isnt a playground ,its an international test match arena. Video evidence of the incident has nothing whatsoever to do with DRS. I dont think India are fabricating either-there may be some garnishing and it is unlikely that Anderson will be suspended.However i hope fans realise that if there is even an iota of truth in it then this sort of behaviour should not be tolerated and universally condemned -not justified due to Indias stance regarding DRS.

  • ReverseSweepRhino on July 20, 2014, 9:36 GMT

    I think both sides are simply trying to make more out of this incident than there really is. By creating an "us vs them" feeling among the fans, they are trying to raise the emotional profile of this series off the field, because it has been off to an underwhelming start on the field.

    Both captains would be happy to have their home media focus elsewhere, instead of being critical of their boring on-field tactics.

  • BlueJoy on July 20, 2014, 9:19 GMT

    DRS is there or not is a different matter, this concerns the security of the players which is of paramount importance. How Indian players are supposed to know that the Camera is not working. They have the right to ask for it.

    Whatever happens on the pitch we can take it as the spirit of the great game. But not in the pavilion. Dismiss it says the team who made the bar fight between Warner and Root to epic proportions. That being said if India is making wrong allegations they should be punished for that as well.

    Even though this should be pushed out as lack of evidence of Digital proof, we can be never sure of whether there is a neutral witness. Now after the Jellybean incident, Nottingham is quite the controversy ground for Test matches as far as India is concerned.

    Ishant Sharma is nowhere as aggressive as Broad or Anderson with the ball or attitude.

  • milepost on July 20, 2014, 9:18 GMT

    @newschoolcricket, spot on. Henrik doesn't know what he's on about.

  • on July 20, 2014, 9:04 GMT

    surely if a broadcaster had captured the incident it would have been all over the news. no video evidence Anderson's word against Jadejas case not proven.

  • SpaMaster on July 20, 2014, 8:31 GMT

    Funny so many ill-informed people with their sentiments against India are trying to equate lack of DRS on the field to approval of physical contact off the field. Open your eyes.

  • on July 20, 2014, 7:23 GMT

    Having worked in international cricket, the one thing I can assure all of you is that it is mandatory now to have video surveillance in all areas leading from the ground to the players change rooms. In most cases, this video surveillance is monitored by the ACSU personnel in charge of that particular match. I find it rather strange that the ECB has not been following protocol. India has every right to seek the evidence if they believe that it will shed light on what actually happened.

  • muzika_tchaikovskogo on July 20, 2014, 7:12 GMT

    If there's no footage that pretty much ends the matter- acquitted for lack of evidence. Jimmy would do well to keep in mind that he'll not always get away with it. Its just a matter of time before luck catches up with him.

  • on July 20, 2014, 7:00 GMT

    if England need the DRS they should have demanded it strongly before the game. its childish to defend while asking proof for footage. sad that they 're relating A murder with candy theft.

  • on July 20, 2014, 6:57 GMT

    I see many of them confused with the argument going on here. its about problem of evidence. not about on or off the field. its he host responsibility to take care of these things. they should produce the proof when needed else it is taken as they 're intentional

  • NewSchoolCricket on July 20, 2014, 6:53 GMT

    @Henrik Loven - That's right Henrik. All charges are hearsay unless there is video footage proving otherwise. lol

  • cheatsdontprosper on July 20, 2014, 6:27 GMT

    This STORY is like a children's Fairy tale !!!!!! India ASK for VIDEO REVIEW of alleged incident ? FUNNY HOW India want a review for a SILLY playground PUSH !!! NO DRS but We want Camera's Everywhere BUT ON THE PITCH !!!!! SO by this I deduce that India are more worried about WHAT goes on OFF the Pitch RATHER than FAIR PLAY and GOOD DECISIONS on the PITCH !!! I suggest Anderson AND Jadeja SHAKE hands and get on with THE GAME, cricket is not PANTOMIME OR A Soap Opera, cricket is a SPORT so lets see some FAIR PLAY from BOTH sides.

  • on July 20, 2014, 6:26 GMT

    Haha poetic justice India. Video footage cannot be used to review this incident as DRS is disabled.

    Seems very much like the Indians like to dish out attitude but can't handle is coming back at them. Sharma for one regularly bounces down the pitch giving verbal and I'm sure he's not asking how the batsmen is.

    Get on with playing the game.

  • on July 20, 2014, 3:08 GMT

    India are "surprised, disappointed and have reacted with incredulity" because there is no video footage. What I would like to know is why the incident is alleged to have taken place in an area where there was/is no video coverage. Any court of law would immediately dismiss India's charge without a hearing on the ground that it is - at best - hearsay.

  • bhushanB on July 20, 2014, 2:02 GMT

    Now a days you have cameras every where... cameras definitely follow players when they get onto the field at the start of a session and when they return to the dressing room at the end of the session.. there are usually more than one covering that... one would grab the impact player from the session for a quick interview.. they show who leads the team onto the ground.. and off the ground back into the pavilion...there are spider cameras, footage from the sky camera...

    Very ridiculous to suggest that there is no video footage available...

  • jmcilhinney on July 20, 2014, 0:16 GMT

    I certainly have no more insight into what happened than anyone else but I will say that, as an England fan, I don't believe that India are fabricating this charge purely as a tactic. I'm sure that they believe that something worthy of sanction occurred. That said, the fact that they say themselves that it wasn't just this incident that led to their decision to lay charges suggests to me that they may have exaggerated, intentionally or otherwise. I'm not a big fan of sledging at all and I would certainly agree that Anderson can hold his own against anyone in that department, so I know he's no choirboy. I think it's a shame that there is no video evidence because, while that wouldn't necessarily tell us what was said, at least we'd be able to see the nature of any physical contact that occurred. If it comes down to India's word against England's, I'm not sure that they really can go as far as suspending anyone and animosity will continue either way.

  • GermanPlayer on July 19, 2014, 23:22 GMT

    Come to think of it! These two nations are the biggest controllers of today's game and they can't even get well together...

  • FredBoycott on July 19, 2014, 22:34 GMT

    No video in use for off field 'incidents'. Same as for on field incidents. Surprising to hear BCCI asking for a video review.

  • Andre2 on July 19, 2014, 21:16 GMT

    BCCI do not want video, DRS and the rest when the absence of videos and technologies can favour their players ... and at the same they are complaining that no video is available in the case of Anderson vs. Jadeja. Come on BCCI : be logical !! Accept video and DRS on the field, and you will have video off the field !

  • on July 19, 2014, 21:10 GMT

    So the Indians demand camera footage off the field but on the field, they couldn't care less. How ironic.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on July 19, 2014, 21:10 GMT

    So the Indians demand camera footage off the field but on the field, they couldn't care less. How ironic.

  • Andre2 on July 19, 2014, 21:16 GMT

    BCCI do not want video, DRS and the rest when the absence of videos and technologies can favour their players ... and at the same they are complaining that no video is available in the case of Anderson vs. Jadeja. Come on BCCI : be logical !! Accept video and DRS on the field, and you will have video off the field !

  • FredBoycott on July 19, 2014, 22:34 GMT

    No video in use for off field 'incidents'. Same as for on field incidents. Surprising to hear BCCI asking for a video review.

  • GermanPlayer on July 19, 2014, 23:22 GMT

    Come to think of it! These two nations are the biggest controllers of today's game and they can't even get well together...

  • jmcilhinney on July 20, 2014, 0:16 GMT

    I certainly have no more insight into what happened than anyone else but I will say that, as an England fan, I don't believe that India are fabricating this charge purely as a tactic. I'm sure that they believe that something worthy of sanction occurred. That said, the fact that they say themselves that it wasn't just this incident that led to their decision to lay charges suggests to me that they may have exaggerated, intentionally or otherwise. I'm not a big fan of sledging at all and I would certainly agree that Anderson can hold his own against anyone in that department, so I know he's no choirboy. I think it's a shame that there is no video evidence because, while that wouldn't necessarily tell us what was said, at least we'd be able to see the nature of any physical contact that occurred. If it comes down to India's word against England's, I'm not sure that they really can go as far as suspending anyone and animosity will continue either way.

  • bhushanB on July 20, 2014, 2:02 GMT

    Now a days you have cameras every where... cameras definitely follow players when they get onto the field at the start of a session and when they return to the dressing room at the end of the session.. there are usually more than one covering that... one would grab the impact player from the session for a quick interview.. they show who leads the team onto the ground.. and off the ground back into the pavilion...there are spider cameras, footage from the sky camera...

    Very ridiculous to suggest that there is no video footage available...

  • on July 20, 2014, 3:08 GMT

    India are "surprised, disappointed and have reacted with incredulity" because there is no video footage. What I would like to know is why the incident is alleged to have taken place in an area where there was/is no video coverage. Any court of law would immediately dismiss India's charge without a hearing on the ground that it is - at best - hearsay.

  • on July 20, 2014, 6:26 GMT

    Haha poetic justice India. Video footage cannot be used to review this incident as DRS is disabled.

    Seems very much like the Indians like to dish out attitude but can't handle is coming back at them. Sharma for one regularly bounces down the pitch giving verbal and I'm sure he's not asking how the batsmen is.

    Get on with playing the game.

  • cheatsdontprosper on July 20, 2014, 6:27 GMT

    This STORY is like a children's Fairy tale !!!!!! India ASK for VIDEO REVIEW of alleged incident ? FUNNY HOW India want a review for a SILLY playground PUSH !!! NO DRS but We want Camera's Everywhere BUT ON THE PITCH !!!!! SO by this I deduce that India are more worried about WHAT goes on OFF the Pitch RATHER than FAIR PLAY and GOOD DECISIONS on the PITCH !!! I suggest Anderson AND Jadeja SHAKE hands and get on with THE GAME, cricket is not PANTOMIME OR A Soap Opera, cricket is a SPORT so lets see some FAIR PLAY from BOTH sides.

  • NewSchoolCricket on July 20, 2014, 6:53 GMT

    @Henrik Loven - That's right Henrik. All charges are hearsay unless there is video footage proving otherwise. lol